1 2025:CGHC:21699 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3656 of 2025 Tomesh Kaushal So. Sanjay Kaushal Aged About 23 Years R/o. Aws 102-103-104, Sita Nagar, Gogaon, P.S. - Gudhiyari, Dist. Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Station House Officer, Khamardih, Raipur, Dist. Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 09.05.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the BNSS in connection with Crime No.025/2025 registered at Police Station Khamardih, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 34 of the IPC. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that, the complainant namely Dr. Avinash Dhole lodged a written complaint on 20/01/2025 alleging AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 that through his facebook account, he received a link related to share market and forex trading which encouraged to invest to make double profit. Thereafter one unknown person namely Daniel Clarke (Mo.447311910548) added complainant to whatsapp and called him and he transferred Rs.45,000, Rs.35,000 and Rs. 95,000 total Rs.1,70,000 to the bank account No. 43001456350, IFSC- SBIN0071174) given to him. It is also alleged that different account numbers were provided by the co- accused to transfer further deposit money into bank accounts. He was later paid Rs.25,000 as an assurance after which he was demanded Rs 9 lakh, therefore, the complainant lodged the report against the co-accused Tomesh Kaushal. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated and the allegations against the applicant are false, baseless and malicious. The FIR has been lodged after the delay of one year from the date of incident against one Daniel Clarke and the present applicant has neither committed nor participated in such act and he has no knowledge about the incident. The applicant has not received any money from the complainant and he has never contacted the complainant and demanded money through any type of communication. There is no documentary proof of the alleged offence and there was no wrongful intent on the part of the applicant to commit the alleged offence and there is no seizure from the present applicant. According to the written 3 complaint, main accused who is behind all the conspiracy is Daniel Clarke who insisted the complainant that if the complainant will invest in the share market, then the complainant will receive double profit, the applicant has no role to play in the present crime. Lastly, the applicant is in jail since 23.01.2025 and though the charge-sheet has been filed, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, hence he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent / State submits that the bail application of the co-accused namely, Govind Yadav has already been rejected by this Court in MCRC No. 2164 of 2025 vide order dated 19.03.2025 and the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused, as such, the bail application of the applicant is also liable to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Perusal of the case diary goes to show that applicant along with co-accused has defrauded the complainant for an amount of Rs.1,70,000/- by luring him to invest his money in share trading for a greater amount of profit and further, the bail application of the co-accused namely, Govind Yadav has already been rejected by this Court in MCRC No. 2164 of 2025 vide order dated 19.03.2025 and the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused. It appears that day by day, the crime of 4 cheating people by luring them with high profits through online medium and grabbing their money is increasing, as such, looking to the allegations levelled against the applicant, though the applicant is languishing in jail since 23.01.2025 and the charge- sheet has been filed, this Court is of the opinion that the bail application is liable to be rejected. 7. Therefore, the bail application filed by the applicant/accused – Tomesh Kaushal involved in Crime No.025/2025 registered at Police Station Khamardih, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 34 of the IPC, is rejected at this stage. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned, is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Akhil